These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: [The interaction between rocuronium and smoking. The effect of smoking on neuromuscular transmission after rocuronium].
    Author: Latorre F, de Almeida MC, Stanek A, Kleemann PP.
    Journal: Anaesthesist; 1997 Jun; 46(6):493-5. PubMed ID: 9297380.
    Abstract:
    UNLABELLED: Recent studies have shown different results concerning the effects of smoking on neuromuscular blocking agents. Some reports indicate that smokers need higher doses of vecuronium, but are more sensitive to atracurium. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of smoking on onset and recovery time after a single 0.6 mg/kg intubating dose of rocuronium an analog of vecuronium. METHODS: Following institutional approval and informed consent, 20 smokers (> 10 cigarettes/day) and 20 nonsmokers were included in the study. Following oxazepam premedication and induction with fentanyl and thiopental, single-twitch stimulation of the ulnar nerve was performed every 10 s. Following stabilisation of control responses, patients received rocuronium 0.6 mg/kg for intubation. Anaesthesia was maintained with enflurane < or = 0.8 vol.% (end-tidal) and 65% nitrous oxide in oxygen. Onset time and recovery to 25% and 75% of the twitch control values were recorded. RESULTS: Onset and recovery times were not different between smokers and nonsmokers. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the present study suggest that chronic nicotine exposure does not change onset time or duration of rocuronium neuromuscular blockade. A previous study found a greater need for vecuronium in smokers and discussed stimulation of the neuromuscular junction and enhanced biotransformation due to the enzyme-inducing properties of nicotine. The differences in our results could be partly due to a longer period of refraining from smoking in our patients, leading to very low nicotine blood concentrations without the proposed receptor-stimulating effect. Another cause for different behaviour of the two analogs could be different elimination pathways. Recent investigations suggest that rocuronium may not be eliminated principally by the liver. Therefore, enhanced nicotine-induced biotransformation, as suggested for vecuronium, would not occur with rocuronium.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]